On Jan 15, Emanuele Rocca <ema@linux.it> wrote: > So the current situation is that we make an active effort to produce two > different types of installation media: one that works for all users, and > one broken for most laptops. Some sort of FOSS version of an > anti-feature. Then we publish the broken version on the front page, and > hide very carefully the version that works. > > This absurdly damages our users without improving the state of Free > Software in any way, while Ubuntu puts the firmware back into the images > and can rightly claim to be easier to install. Since I already wrote about all this in 2004 and before, I am not going to repeat myself in this thread: http://blog.bofh.it/id_33 . It was as much obvious then and it still is now. Hopefully at this time there will be less DFSG-revisionists around so that we can reach a different outcome. (And again, "editorial changes" weren't.) -- ciao, Marco
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature